WPC& U.V % 0Cw@ 04 # A 0L B 1m 4j z~ z r  ^x "   ! !n ) 0J 0TN 0^ 0h 0rh 0| 0V 0 1ulU, 0d  D3q 0@U,B)DC9 AM|U*v~vC 0d 0z 0 0 03! 0! 0" 0# AOx$$ 0D% D/% B&<6X9`+CourierX($     E[LDӀ ( T$  HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (D(2$ T!   4X   0   dstuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Gav 456789:;<=>?includ[ingT.C.A.Clenny ss I]fMahlerinclud[ingT.C.A.Clenny ss I]fMahlerHJ<6X9`+Courier#6X9`+Courier'O?xxxhhXx5>{*G?FFFhh/XF5iL2OcL4|,:q@ /:ll LLL ҟ=3|x ""AHOZq~}E? <//NA^2RP@@NL "AHOZq~}E? <//NA^2RP@@NL 2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   !" ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X 'dxd("$    <  9p`(Monaco% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd-0C << G<  9p`(Arial !$  22   YYY FILED2XMay9,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d#$   $ 4  X        Someofthesefactorswerecomplainedofbothintheevidentiaryhearingandinpetitionersbriefonappeal,whileotherswereonlymentionedeitherinpetitionersbrieforinthehearingbutnotinboth.Wehaveaddressedalloftheseassertions.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco (<1$26.  0  3  0  (gfi$0  2(6.  0  .  0  3  0` (#(#(b$0  0` (#(#2A   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xr$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2A(  0  )3  0 (# (#(U$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2A(  a  )3  0h(#(#(@$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2A(   )3  0h(#h(#(t$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2A  0  )3  0(#(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2A  a  )3  0p(#(#-C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . $&..Xd&#..Xd#  4  X `   \RA'\ћ  @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLE@ JANUARY1996SESSIONPATRICKWILLIAMS,  *C.C.A.NO.01C019506CR00190 APPELLANT,  *DAVIDSONCOUNTYٜL130;+'h|v`  `LߛVS.     *Hon.J.RandallWyatt,Jr.,JudgeSTATEOFTENNESSEE,  *(PostConviction) APPELLEE.   *   ForAppellant:    ForAppellee:RobertJ.Turner   CharlesW.Burson208ThirdAvenueNorth  AttorneyGeneralandReporterSuite300    Nashville,TN37201  MichelleL.Lehmann      CounselfortheState      CriminalJusticeDivision      450JamesRobertsonParkway      Nashville,TN372430493      KatrinMiller      Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral      WashingtonSquare,Suite500      222SecondAvenueSouth      Nashville,TN37201      OPINIONFILED:򀀀AFFIRMEDGARYR.WADE,JUDGE%  72XXdXXd7   OPINION     Thepetitioner,PatrickWilliams,appealsthetrialcourt'sdenialofhispetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Theissuespresentedforourreviewareasfollows:8 8 (1) whetherthepetitionerreceivedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel;8 8 (2) whetherthepetitionerenteredhisguiltypleasknowinglyandvoluntarily;and8 8 (3) whetherthepetitioneragreedtoserveanillegalsentencewhichshouldbesetaside.  Wefindnoerrorandaffirmthetrialcourt'sjudgment.  Thepetitionerwasindictedonthreecountsofaggravatedrobberyandtwocountsofaggravatedassault.OnOctober7,1993,hepledguiltytothethreecountsofaggravatedrobberyandoneoftheaggravatedassaultcountsandagreedtoaRangeI,twentyyearsentence:threeeightyearsentencesfortheaggravatedrobberycounts,oneofwhichistobeconsecutive,andaconsecutivefouryearsentencefortheaggravatedassaultcount.Thestatedismissedthesecondcountofaggravatedassault.  Alittlemorethanayearlater,thepetitioner,throughcounsel,filedanamendedpetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Followinganevidentiaryhearing,thetrialcourtdeniedrelief,findingthatthepetitionerreceivedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounselandthathehadenteredhisguiltypleasknowinglyandvoluntarily.Thetrialcourtalsofoundthatthesentenceswerenotillegal.  I    Inorderforthepetitionertobegrantedreliefonthegroundsofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,hemustestablishthattheadvicegivenortheservicesrenderedwerenotwithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcasesandthat,butforhiscounsel'sdeficientperformance,theresultofhistrialwouldhavebeendifferent.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,693(1984);Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Thistwopartstandard,asitappliestoguiltypleas,ismetwhenthepetitionerestablishesthat,butforhiscounsel'serrors,hewouldnothavepledguiltyandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.Hillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,53(1985).    Atthehearing,thepetitionerclaimedhistrialcounselwasineffectiveforthefollowingreasons:8 8 (1) shefailedtofullyexplaintothepetitionerthatoneoftheeightyearsentencesforaggravatedrobberywasconsecutivetotheothertwo,leadinghimtobelievehiseffectivesentencewastwelveyearsinsteadofthetwentyyearsactuallyagreedupon;8 8 (2) shefailedtoexplaintothepetitionerortoconsiderinadvisingthepetitionerthelawconcerningwhenconsecutivesentencesmaybeimposed;8 8 (3) shefailedtoadvisehimofhisrighttoappealtheconsecutivesentencesorthetimeframewithinwhichanappealmustbefiled;and8 8 (4) shefailedtoobjectwhenthedefendantenteredhisguiltypleasinviolationofthemandatesofBoykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238(1969);Statev.Mackey,553S.W.2d337(Tenn.1977);andRule11oftheTennesseeRulesofCriminalProcedure.  Oncrossexamination,thepetitionerconcededthattrialcounselhadsuccessfullynegotiatedadismissalofoneoftheaggravatedassaultchargesandthatshehadpersuadedthestatetoreduceitsoriginalofferofthirtyyearstotwentyyears.Althoughthepetitionerinsistedthathedidnotreadthedocumentbeforehand,healsoadmittedhavingsignedthepetitiontoenterguiltypleas.  Trialcounseltestifiedthatshehadworkedatthepublicdefender'sofficeforsixyearsandhadrepresentedabout"athousand"criminaldefendants.Shestatedthatshereadthepetitiontoentertheguiltypleas"wordforword"tothepetitionerandthatheappearedtofullyunderstandthathewouldhavetoserveasentenceoftwentyyears.Whileacknowledgingthatshedidnot"take[the]T.C.A....andsitdowntoexplaintoMr.Williams"thestatutorygroundsforconsecutivesentencing,trialcounselclaimedthatshehadalsoinformedthepetitionerofthe"potentialpunishmenthefaced...includ[ingtheriskof]consecutivesentencing"beforeheacceptedthestatesoffer.Trialcounselconcededthatshedidnotdiscusswiththepetitionertheoptionofenteringanopenguiltypleatherebyauthorizingthetrialcourttoimposeasentence.  Thetrialcourtfoundnomerittothefirsttwoclaimsofineffectivecounsel.Weagree.Theburdenisonthepetitionertoshowthattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthefindingsofthetrialjudge.Clennyv.State,576S.W.2d12,14(Tenn.Crim.App.1978),cert.denied,441U.S.947(1979).Otherwise,findingsoffactmadebythetrialcourtareconclusive.Gravesv.State,512S.W.2d603,604(Tenn.Crim.App.1973).Thetrialcourtaccreditedthetestimonyoftrialcounsel.Thepetitionerfailedtodemonstratethathewouldnothaveenteredhispleaevenifhehadknownthatthetrialjudgemightnothaveimposedconsecutivesentences.Inshort,theevidencesimplydoesnotpreponderateagainstthefindingsofthetrialcourt.̀  Werejectoutrightthethirdclaim,i.e.,thattrialcounselfailedtotimelyinformthepetitionerofhisrighttoappealthesentence.Thatisaprivilegethepetitionerexpresslywaived,afterwarningsfromthetrialjudge,asapartofthepleaagreement.Adefendantsrighttoappealafteraguiltypleaislimited.Anappealmayoccuronlywhenthereisnoagreementastothesentence.Tenn.R.Crim.P.37(b)andCommitteeComments;Tenn.R.App.P.3(b);EricWilliamsonv.State,No.02C019305CR00096(Tenn.Crim.App.,atJackson,May11,1994),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1994).Becausethepetitioneracceptedaspecificsentenceinthiscase,trialcounselcouldnotproperlyadvisehimthathehadanyrighttoappeal.  Aspointedoutinthenextsectionofthisopinion,wealsoholdthatthepetitionerwasadequatelywarnedofhisconstitutionalrightsbeforeenteringhispleas.Thustrialcounselcouldnothavebeeninerrorforfailingtorequiremoreorotherwiseobjecttotheadmonitionsmade.Inourview,thepetitionerreceivedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.  II    Thepetitioner'ssecondissueisthathispleaswereneitherknowinglynorvoluntarilyentered.InBoykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238(1969),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtestablishedthattheadmonitionofcertainrightsarerequiredbytheconstitutionbeforetheacceptanceofaguiltyplea.Includedamongthoserightsistheprivilegeagainstselfincrimination,therighttoconfrontwitnesses,andtherighttoatrialbyjury.Anintentionalrelinquishmentoftheserightscannotbepresumedfromasilentrecord.SeeStatev.Mackey,553S.W.2d337(Tenn.1977).InStatev.Neal,810S.W.2d131(Tenn.1991),oursupremecourtestablishedguidelinesforthereviewofguiltypleas.Whiletheoverridingdeterminationofthevalidityoftheguiltyplearestsuponwhetheritwasknowinglyandvoluntarilyentered,proofofthefailuretowarnofarecognizedrightshiftstheburdenofprooftothestate.ϜId.at13940.Ifthetrialcourtsubstantiallycomplieswiththelitanyofconstitutionalrightsmandated,thereisnoerror.InJohnsonv.State,834S.W.2d922,926(Tenn.1992),oursupremecourtheldasfollows:8 8 [I]fthetranscriptshowsthatthepetitionerwasawareofhisconstitutionalrights,heisnotentitledtoreliefonthegroundthatthemandatedadvicewasnotgiven.Also,ifalltheproofpresentedatthepostconvictionhearing,includingthetranscriptoftheguiltypleahearing,showsthepetitionerwasawareofhisconstitutionalrights,heisnotentitledtorelief.  Thepetitionercontendshisguiltypleaswerenotknowinglyandvoluntarilyenteredbecausethetrialcourtfailedtoaddressthefollowingfactors: 4   8 8 (1) thattheguiltypleascouldbeusedtoenhancepunishmentforfuturecrimes;8 8 (2) thenatureofthechargesuponwhichthepleaisbased;8 8 (3) whetherthepleawasvoluntary;8 8 (4) thatifthedefendantfailedtorespondtruthfullytoquestionsaskedaboutthecrimesduringthesubmissionhearing,hecouldbeprosecutedforperjuryorfalsestatement;and8 8 (5) thatpunishmentforthepresentcrimetowhichheispleadingguiltycouldbeenhancedifpriorconvictionsorcertainotherfactorsareestablishedatthesentencinghearing.Thetranscriptofthesubmissionhearingclearlyestablishesthatthetrialcourtadequatelyaddressedthefirstthreefactors.  Initially,thetrialcourtwarnedthepetitioner,"Ifyouareconvictedagaininthefuture,thenthesefourconvictionsheretodaycouldpossiblybeusedtoenhancesomefuturepenalty....Anddoyouunderstandthat...?"Thedefendantresponded,"Yes,sir."Moreover,thiswarningisnotconstitutionallybasedandwouldnot,evenifomitted,qualifyasagroundforpostconvictionrelief.Statev.Neal,810S.W.2d131,138(Tenn.1988).  Secondly,thetrialcourtadvisedthepetitionerthathewaspleadingguiltytothreecountsofaggravatedrobberyandonecountofaggravatedassault.Thestateannouncedbystipulationthefactualbasisforthepleas.Thusthepetitionerwassufficientlyadvisedofthenatureofthecharges.  Astothethirdfactor,thepetitionerclaimsheonlypledguiltybecausehiscounselhadsaidthatthestatewouldotherwisewithdrawitspleaoffer;however,thepetitioneransweredthequestionsofthetrialjudgeduringthesubmissionhearingasfollows:8 8 Q:[A]reyouenteringthispleaofguiltyhere,eventhoughit'snotoneofyourbestdays,Iunderstandthat,butisitwhatyou'vechosentodounderallofthecircumstances?8 8 A:Yes.8 8 Q:Okay.Andareyoudoingthisofyourownvoluntarydecision?8 8 A:Yes.Thisdialogueestablishesthetrialcourtexaminedthepetitioneraboutthevoluntarinessoftheguiltyplea.Certainly,theproofinthisrecorddoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourtsfindingthatthepleawasknowinglyandvoluntarilymade.  Astotheclaimsthatthepetitionerwasnotwarnedofthepossibilityofaperjurychargeoranylikelihoodofasentenceenhancement,thetranscriptestablishesthatthetrialcourtdidnotaddresstheseissuesduringthesubmissionhearing.SeeTenn.R.Crim.P.11(c)(5).Neitherofthesewarningsoftheadvicelitanyare,however,constitutionallymandatedandthereforearenotcognizableasabasisforreliefinapostconvictionproceeding.Teaguev.State,789S.W.2d916,917(Tenn.Crim.App.1990)andTenn.CodeAnn.4030105.Furthermore,theissueofadvisingthepetitionerthatifhepleadsguilty,priorconvictionsorotherfactorsmaybeestablishedthatenhancehissentenceforthecrimetowhichheispleadingguilty,isclearlyinapplicableunderthefactsofthiscase.Thepetitioneragreedtoaspecificsentence,whichthetrialcourtcouldeitherapproveorrejectbutcouldnotalter.SeeTenn.R.Crim.P.11(e).Here,therewasnoriskthatfactorscouldbeestablishedwhichwouldenhancehissentence.TheMackeycourtstatedthisadviceshouldbegivenonly"ifapplicable"tothedefendantunderconsideration.SeeStatev.Mackey,553S.W.2dat341.  III    Thepetitioner'sfinalcontentionisthatthesentencewasillegalbecausehedidnotmeetanyofthestatutoryclassificationsforconsecutivesentencing.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035115.Wedisagree.  InStatev.Mahler,735S.W.2d226(Tenn.1987),oursupremecourtheldthatadefendantwhohadenteredaknowingandvoluntarypleaofguilttoasentencewithinthestatutoryrangecouldacceptclassificationasaRangeIIoffender,eventhoughhedidnottechnicallyqualifyaboveRangeI.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035105through109.Thesentencewasaffirmedonthebasisthatthedefendantcouldlegitimatelyenterapleaagreementwithintherangeofpunishmentprovidedbylaw,evenifhedidnothaveasufficientpriorrecordtowarrantthehigherclassificationwithintherange.Statev.Mahler,735S.W.2dat22728.Becausetherangeclassificationisbaseduponfact(priorcriminalhistoryofthedefendant)andthereforesubjecttopleanegotiation,anarrangementasthatmadeinMahlerispermissible.  ThereasoninginMahlercontrolshere.Theapplicabilityofconsecutivesentencingisalsobasedonfactandisthereforesubjecttopleanegotiation.Weholdthatthepetitioner'spleaagreementtoserveconsecutivesentences,wherestatutoryfactorssuggestingconsecutivesentencingmaynotexist,isnotillegalandcannotbesetaside.  Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.      ________________________________      GaryR.Wade,JudgeCONCUR:________________________________PaulG.Summers,Judge_______________________________JosephM.Tipton,Judge